About your Search

20120901
20120930
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
as president of the united states. they'd like to hear some specifics. >> well, i can tell them specifically what my policy looks like. i will not raise tacks on middle income folks. i will not lower the share of tacks paid by high-income individuals, and i will make sure that we bring down rates, we limit deductions and exemptions. >> what are we talking about, the mortgage deduction, the charitable deduction? >> the devil is in the details. the angel is in the policy which is creating more jobs. >> right. freedom, check. angels, check. throw in the towel, mr. president. this guy is going to obviously win. let's get right to our panel. in los angeles msnbc contributor matt miller. in minneapolis anna marie cox, correspondent for "the guardian" and in washington msnbc political analyst karen finney. anna, if i might begin with you, in listening to mitt romney's responses this weekend and looking at the diagnosticcle and statistical manual of mental illness he appears to be suffering two forms of delusion, grandiose delusion where the individual has an inflated view of himself and also perscu
of the united states, and i don't think that they actually wanted to interview him. i don't think the republican party wanted to bring him in for a live interview. they saw his resume. it's a fantastic resume when you look at it on paper, but then you look at his record now and his positions now versus his record then, they don't trust him as dr. peterson just said. that's the problem. they don't actually think he's a conservative, and if you don't believe me, look at his record as governor. they know that. republicans aren't stupid. at least most of them aren't. i would say the same amount of dumb democrats, if you will, so they balance each other out. but my point is he's interviewing for a job and they don't like the candidate for the job and guess what? he may not actually win. >> martin, i'm glad you pointed this out. one, that sort of gives you the reason why he's creating this insane rationale about the 47%. he's trying to prove how he's going to be able to secure the office but it also underscores the fact that this is a transactional relationship. this is a quid pro quo relationship whe
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)